PerreaultForever

Depends on how you check, but that is perhaps why Dahlin favors that semi hip check of his that pisses off some opponents. You'll see Clifton is more forward and direct to the mid section. He likes to make himself compact and come right at the chest with shoulder or gloves. I suppose he adapted that because of his size.

I agree but "stupid" might be too strong. there is an advantage to be able to take the quick shot or control the point faster with the puck coming up the wall.

Tkachuk?

I only meant "wrong side" with the traditional shoots left or shoots right thing. I personally think the righty/lefty aspect is not a huge thing on D for many players. Power played "wrong" side at the worlds too and was just fine. Clifton's played both sides. The important thing is who pairs best with him and how you utilize that pairing situationally. My personal view is usually pairings of a more offensive puck moving guy with a more physical stay at home guy and so I liked the Dahlin Samuelsson pairing and would probably keep that but idk what they have planned. Having said that though, 2 guys who click together and communicate well covering for each other in a system where when one rushes one drops in support etc etc is invaluable and that just has to be found by Granato and stuck with.

Bruins basically retained the same defensive system they'd been using with Cassidy. This is hard for us to employ because it requires a lot of disciplined structure from the forwards. Good luck getting Skinner to buy into that. Hopefully we figure out something. In terms of the D, we already employ what Monty brought. He just let the D drive and join the rush. I've said for a while I think Clifton is a seamless fit for us because of that. He has the speed and he already has the style. he pairs perfectly with Power or Dahlin. He blocks shots and hits a lot as well. Only drawbacks are his size/reach and his tendency to sometimes go for the extra hit and get caught out of position.

That's definitely true, but an on ice pairing is a constant relationship. It is one of the things we were lacking last year imo. It of course depends on what (if anything) Johnson has left.

I don't disagree, but I also think we shouldn't make any assumptions on pairings and lines based on last year. I am hoping that Granato will start from scratch with winning and playoffs in mind and "development" leashes will be short or non existent. Right now the D pairings have a few different options. My biggest concern for this team is PK and face offs. We didn't address that at all. (goaltending also remains the biggest question, but there's nothing to discuss there, as the rookie is great or he isn't)

Clifton won't outperform Samuelsson, but he does bring a different dynamic to this team. He played up and down the line up in Boston and he has also spent time on the wrong side when they had multiple injuries. He's not a perfect D man by any stretch, but he is versatile. I think his best pairing is with Power, but some of this might depend on how they plan to use Johnson and whether or not he has anything left in the tank. I am wondering if the idea of a veteran mentor for Power for one year isn't in their minds.

I wouldn't necessarily either but how does it put anyone out of their element? Dahlin's playing on his wrong side now. As for Muel wasted, it would be a shutdown pairing that plays heavy PK minutes and goes up against top offensive opposition. If you want to roll with heavy minutes for your top pairing and limited time for the 3rd pairing sure, but it's a long season and having 3 good D pairs isn't a terrible idea.

Actually I think it makes a lot of sense. But I think he'd want to go to a team with a good D where he is in a position to succeed. Not many teams have any money left and don't want to sign up guys for long term but when the cap goes up and reportedly up and up again after that the vaults will open so he can then get his long deal right into the end of his career. A year from now he gets a bigger deal than signing one now, bet on it.

Oh it's possible. I'd say not probable, but possible. If he is like another Grier I'd be happy. Mike Foligno.......sigh..........you got me thinking how we could really use a modern day Mike Foligno.

Not saying they would do this, but it's also possible Dahlin goes back to the left side. Dahlin-Clifton(?) Power-Johnson Samuelsson-Lybushkin Stillman-Jokiharju Hanifin to Buffalo seems unlikely to me.

That is a very optimistic and dare I say lofty view of Greenway and his abilities. I definitely didn't see any of that last year and Minnesota clearly didn't see that but I guess it's possible (?). He has the size, so I guess you're suggesting he still hasn't reached his full potential and will late bloom sort of like Thompson? Well, I hope you're right, and if you are it's the trade of the decade for the Sabres but I personally can't pin my hopes on that. I see Greenway as a kind of less skilled but younger John Van Riemsdyck at best and possibly a lot less.

Mitts end of the year maybe gets in as well but I'm still not sure what he is. The top line was the top line and you have to expect the same or similar next year in order to compete. Dahlin as well. They were already good the year before and you expect it to continue. Skinner's got a hot and cold career though so we shall see. The top line can compete with others for sure. The key to moving up is having the second line and that's where Cozens came in. If we can have a truly dangerous second line (and I think we can) then the question is still what does the third and fourth line do? They need to play at least even with other teams for us to succeed. Who ends up on which line is interesting to me and a lot will depend on Mitts and also on whether Greenway can be anything of value.

That's only partially true though. UPL certainly didn't prove it so now (at the moment) it's in the hands of a rookie. Not something I'd bet on. The main reason we were better last year was not because of Quinn and Peterka (or Krebs). It was because Cozens took a huge leap forward - HUGE - Samuelsson showed himself to be a capable NHLer on a consistent basis and Power was above his years as a rookie. Those 3 things were the big difference but who is the leap forward this year? It's not Quinn, we know that already. Again, at the moment, it all hinges on the rookie goalie.

The cross purposes boils down to this (in generalizations). Playoff teams by and large have veterans throughout their line up and any rookie coming up has to earn a spot based on his play or else he stays down in the minors. We, as the development team placed rookies in the line up to let them learn on the job and make mistakes along the way. The (perhaps unexpected) playoff possibility had them reduce ice time for some of these guys who cost us at times earlier in the year. But the overall plan was to let them all grow together. If this continues with newer prospects the same results will continue. Weaknesses are weaknesses and you need to improve those specific things if you want to be better and not just a general overall improvement. I've acknowledged our D looks better, I'm just questioning whether it's good enough yet. I don't think it is. I also don't think I see great 2 way defense from the list of players above. I'm pretty confidant Clifton gives us a better version of Lybushkin but he's not a top pairing guy, he will just make a good stop gap fix to pair with Power (guessing). I saw nothing in Greenway that makes me think he's anything. Stillman is not good. Krebs I'm still not sold on. A lot of people love Krebs here, but I've yet to see anything that puts him above a 4C. Samuelsson is of course a developing solid D man and Cozens is just fine but he's the only top forward we have who can play 2 way hockey at this point imo. and then there's the goalie question. Call it pessimism over optimism or whatever you want, but, although the moves made were fine, and I like Clifton quite a bit, I just don't think we did enough.

Uh huh. Really? So if that's true, when exactly will he be looking to get us in the playoffs cause I kind of thought that was the goal we were supposed to be working on.

Worked big for Tolvanen in Seattle. It's possible.

Well, I don't think he's done enough to get us in the playoffs so he needs to make a trade or two. The D is better and deeper but it's not what I'd call great. Could still be improved. Goaltending is rookie dependent. He seems prepared to gamble a whole season on a rookie's performance. As a fan I'm not. We still do not have good 2 way players who can play on the PK or in hard/gritty shutdown type roles and win face offs consistently. I don't see us as better enough to move past the competition unless there's a total collapse by somebody and Ottawa will also be pressing for that last playoff spot. It's just not enough to give me confidence.

Being that "Toronto guy" is part of why I wanted us to try to sign him. Still close to home for him. Carolina is my early pick to be in the cup after their moves. Reaves isn't a "joke" but he's definitely past his best before date. 3 years was crazy. There's a lot of beef in our division though. I know it's not the old days, but it might still be a problem.

Oh no, didn't mean to imply that. They lie on both sides around this time of year for sure. The players lie too as they tell you how excited they are to be wherever even if they signed that last minute one year deal when the offers they actually wanted disappear. eg. Taylor Hall coming to Buffalo.

I think the plan is probably based more along cap lines. So in very rough numbers, the cap will be about 90 million in a few years. If your D gets what, a third? That's roughly 30 million. If you have two superstars in Dahlin and Power that's roughly 20 of that 30 leaving you 10ish for the other 4 D men. After Samuelsson there's not much money left there for this 4D and so paying a guy like Clifton 3 million plus is about as good as you can do.

It's true, and most of that stuff is just pure BS anyway. GMs lie a lot at this time of year. On a similar theme, it was funny today after reading for weeks how Sweeney said he was talking to all their free agents and trying to sign Bertuzzi etc. Bertuzzi's agent yesterday tweeted that he hadn't talked to Boston at all. So Bertuzzi was never in their plan, even though every report and all the talk said he was. GMs in July are just full of BS.

I haven't taken the time to investigate their prospect pool so I can't answer the which pool would you rather have question. If they are ranked 4th that's pretty good though. I know this year they took the guy I wanted - Nate Danielson - earlier than his ranking so I have to agree with that pick since I wanted him for us. Absolutely true that the picks have to turn into players and time will tell. They might feel more lower level development is the right approach. idk, but there are other teams that believe in this idea contrary to what Adams plan is. Which is better? Again, idk and time will tell. I don't buy into this "block" the young guys theory though. If the young guy is good enough, trades or waivers can get made. Vinnie Hinostroza didn't sign with Buffalo expecting to be relegated to the minors. VO didn't expect to get benched. If the younger guy is better he earns the spot period. At this point neither team has made the playoffs. imo neither looks probable for the playoffs next year either. Possible, but not probable. New Jersey's plan beat both. We will see which of Detroit and Buffalo gets there first, and then we can proclaim the better "plan".

Bunting was a big loss. I wish we'd signed him.